Select Committee on Rules approves Garrett package, rejects multiple individual rule changes

The Select Committee on Rules considered a lengthy set of proposed changes to the Tennessee House’s permanent rules and approved a consolidated package offered by Representative Garrett while rejecting a number of individual submissions from other members.

The committee’s action sets the procedures the full House will consider for adoption: among the measures debated were the length of floor debate (5 minutes versus the previous 15), limits on the number of bills members may file, whether family members may be permitted on the chamber floor, rules for visual aids in committee, formation of member caucuses, a firearms policy for committee rooms, and changes to the process for remote voting when a member is found repeatedly out of order.

Why it matters: the committee’s rules determine how members may speak, how legislation moves through committees and to the floor, and how members may use the chamber and gallery. Changes to debate time, bill-filing limits, recognition and decorum affect how much opportunity individual members and constituencies will have to present and challenge legislation.

The committee’s most consequential action was approval of a consolidated package of rule changes presented by Representative Garrett. That package — which includes provisions on electronic committee voting, handling of motions and points of order, limits on who may sit at the dais during committee consideration, and a sequencing requirement for multi-year presentations — passed on a committee voice vote. Committee members also voted to forward the Garrett package to the full House as a report of the Select Committee on Rules.

Several high-profile individual proposals did not pass. Leader Camper sought to restore a 15-minute speaking limit in Rule 21, saying, "So I would like to have that rule, change back from the 5 minute time limit we have now to the 15 minutes." The proposal failed on a committee voice vote. Leader Camper also proposed raising the per-member bill-filing cap and allocating additional filing slots to leaders and chairs; that submission likewise failed.

Chairman Clemens offered a multi-item set of amendments (including restoring earlier Rule 19 language on calling members to order, removing a calendar-rules time cap, and allowing immediate family on the floor). Clemens framed one proposal about family on the floor as an accommodation for members with young children, saying mothers "should be able to allow to bring their children onto the floor with them." Most of Clemens’ individual proposals were rejected in committee voice votes.

Representative Roseland Jones offered a broad slate of changes aimed at shifting certain powers away from the speaker and increasing minority protections, including lowering thresholds for certain motions, broadening the right to record dissents in the journal, permitting caucus formation without speaker approval, and banning firearms from committee rooms. Jones described several measures in constitutional terms and criticized prior enforcement of rules; one line she used during her remarks was, "This is not a a a palace or a plantation or whatever you want it to be, but this is the people's house." Many of Jones’ proposals were voted down in committee; several items she asked to be decided by roll call were recorded and failed.

Roll-call results the committee recorded included: - Rule 35 (allowing visual aids in committee rooms): failed on roll call, 2 ayes, 9 noes (ayes: Leader Camper; Rep. Hakim). The clerk read the roll during the meeting. - Rule 82 (amendment addressing lobbyist disclosures and limits involving family members): failed on roll call, 2 ayes, 9 noes (ayes: Leader Camper; Rep. Shaw). - Rule 85 (allowing formation of caucuses by three or more members): failed on roll call, 3 ayes, 8 noes (ayes: Leader Camper; Rep. Hakim; Rep. Shaw). - Rule 86 (proposal to ban firearms in committee rooms): failed on roll call, 3 ayes, 8 noes (ayes: Leader Camper; Rep. Hakim; Rep. Shaw).

The committee also recorded that a number of other individual rule submissions (including multiple proposed edits to Rule 19, Rule 21, Rule 44 and Rule 49) were debated and voted on during the meeting; most of those individual submissions were defeated by voice vote.

After debate and votes on individual items, Representative Garrett presented a consolidated set of proposed permanent-rule changes (covering order in the gallery, definitions under Rule 19, formalizing the current practice on sponsor response time in Rule 21, visual-aid restrictions on the floor, a reduction to a 12-bill filing limit per year with specified exceptions for chairs and constitutional officers, electronic committee voting for final committee action, and other housekeeping measures). The committee approved Garrett’s consolidated packet by voice vote and then approved a motion by Chairman Farmer to submit those adopted changes to the full House as the Select Committee’s report.

What the committee did not decide: the meeting did not send any of the defeated, individually offered rule changes to the House; several items that were the subject of public commentary and lengthy member statements (for example, Jones’ proposals on journal dissents, ticketing policy for public gallery access, and expanded minority rights to committee assignments) were voted down by this committee.

Next steps: the committee’s adopted package will be transmitted to the full House for consideration. Any permanent-rule action requires the full House’s further action according to the chamber’s rule-adoption process.

Votes at a glance (selected): - Garrett consolidated package: approved (committee voice vote); motion to forward to full House approved. - Leader Camper Rule 21 (restore 15-minute time blocks): failed (voice vote). - Leader Camper Rule 44 (change filing limits/extra slots for leaders/chairs): failed (voice vote). - Chairman Clemens multiple submissions (Rules 19, 21, 22, 34, 44 and 49 among others): mostly failed (voice votes). - Representative Jones large slate (Rules 2, 4, 6, 10, 19, 21, 29, 30, 32, 35, 74, 82, 85–88): a number failed on voice vote; several (35, 82, 85, 86) were decided by roll call and failed as noted above.

Committee context: the meeting ran for roughly two hours and featured extended floor-style debate and numerous members presenting multi-item rule packages. Several members pressed for procedural protections for minority members and for clearer limits on the speaker’s authority; other members emphasized efficiency, maintaining existing practices, and expediting committee work. The clerk recorded roll-call votes on several items where the sponsor requested a recorded vote.

Speakers quoted in this report are members of the committee and are identified by the titles they used in committee. All direct quotations are taken verbatim from the committee transcript provided to the committee clerk.